Sunday, June 16, 2013

Tragedy in Bangladesh: The High Human Cost of Cheap Clothes

Perhaps to
many people in the West, Bangladesh is just a word on a clothing label. Behind
the label is little knowledge of the country and until recently, a dim
awareness of the conditions under which the clothing is produced. Bangladesh is one of the world’s most densely
populated countries and the eighth most populous with a population of 160
million people. Until 1947, it was part of the British Indian Empire
and at that time, became a part of Pakistan. It won its independence
from Pakistan in 1971 following a liberation war
that cost the lives of three million Bangladeshis. Most of the
country is less than twelve meters above sea level, which makes climate change
particularly concerning for the country. It is a county that is
already vulnerable to natural disasters, such as deadly cyclones in 1970 and
1991, the worst flooding in modern world history in 1998, and is generally
susceptible to cyclones, flooding, and drought. The country is
ranked number one in the world for the number of children suffering from
malnutrition, 76% of urban families were under the recommended caloric intake,
and literacy for men is 61% and 52% for women. This overview paints
a dismal picture of Bangladesh, but should serve to illustrate the
real challenges of poverty and to development in the country.

Although
climate, natural disasters, or the independence movement may all be interesting
topics to explore, the real focus of this presentation is Bangladesh’s garment industry. Bangladesh is the world’s second largest
exporter of clothing to China and has over 5,000 garment
factories. The garment industry employs around 3.5 million people,
of which, more than four-fifths of its $20bn production is exported to the west
(Guardian UK). Bangladesh’s behemoth garment industry is
built upon the lowest labor costs in the world, with garment workers earning a
paltry $37 a month. These low wages are especially attractive to
Western companies because of rising labor costs in China and the fact that there are
virtually no unions in the country (Socialist Worker). In fact,
according to a report by the consulting firm McKinsey and Company, as of 2011,
80% of United States and European textile companies
intended to move from China because of rising costs, citing Bangladesh as the next hot spot. This
comes as little surprise to socialists, who have long understood the
cosmopolitan nature of capitalism, which forever searches for the lowest wages,
weakest regulations, and greatest ability to exploit workers. The
enormous cost of these low wages is the health and human cost paid by workers,
as spotlighted by the recent accidents in Bangladesh.

Bangladesh was not always the juggernaut of
sweatshops. Historically, the Bengal delta was a thriving trade route
which connected China, India, the Middle East, Europe and East Africa. The biggest blow to the
economy was the 1971 Liberation War against Pakistan which resulted in extreme poverty
and economic loss. To recover from the war, the country began
to focus on its ready-made garment export industry (Alternet). The
economic shift over the subsequent decades is best described by economics
professor, Anu Mohammed, who summarized the history as such: “Until the
mid-1980s, jute was the main earner. Then the IMF and the World Bank arrived.
Under their aegis, privatisations and public spending cuts caused unemployment
to rise and led to massive dependence on imports and the decline of local
industries. Bureaucrats in the main parties, army officers, the upper echelons
of the police and the sons of prominent families jumped at the opportunities
(Middle East Online).” Thus, the garment industry in Bangladesh arose out of a larger globalization
project. This project consists of IMF and World Bank policies which
promote low wages, weak unions, privatization of state enterprises, and
liberalized trade.

Europe and the United States have rewarded neoliberal policies
by opening their markets to garments made in Bangladesh. It was the 1974
Multi-Fiber Agreement that initially shifted the North American market to its
garments. The agreement imposed quotas on Asian garments, but Bangladesh did not fall under the umbrella of
quota countries. This made it an attractive location for investment
(AlterNet). More recently, former EU trade commissioner Pascal
Lemy summarized European attitudes towards trade in Dhaka in 2001: “The
European Union is favourably disposed to support Bangladesh in its efforts to
achieve ... greater integration into the global trade system by opening up new
trade possibilities and encouraging greater market penetration.” As a result,
between 2000 and 2012, Bangladesh’s textile industry more than
quadrupled (from $4.8bn to $20bn). New York bank Goldman Sachs even
listed the country as one of the Next Eleven to join Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa in development, despite the fact
that it was still one of the poorest countries in the world (Middle East
Online). Despite pressure from unions and labor activists, U.S. government officials are reluctant
to end preferential trade agreements, including tariff breaks, with Bangladesh. Because Bangladesh sells $4.5 billion worth of goods
to the United States each year, labor activists argue
that ending preferential trade under the WTO’s Generalized System of
Preferences would put pressure on the Bangladeshi government and producers to
improve conditions (New York Times).

Globalization
and more generally, the perennial nature of capitalism to increase profits by
exploiting labor, resulted in conditions of low wages, lack of regulation, few
unions, and unsafe conditions. These conditions created a recipe for
disaster. One such disaster occurred on January 7th 2013, when a fire took the lives of
eight garment workers, each under the age of 16, at the Smart Garment Export, a
small factory of three hundred in central Dhaka. Prior to this, there
was a fire at Tazreen Fashions on November 24 2012, which killed 112 people and
injured thousands. Workers at the Tazreen factory labored ten hours
a day, six days a week, earning $38 a month. Among the brands housed
in the nine story building were Disney and Wal-Mart. The building
itself was locked to prevent theft, which meant that workers were either unable
to escape or forced jump to their death from windows on upper floors. The
factory also violated various fire codes, such as storing flammable materials
on the ground floor and next to stairways (Middle East Online). This
mirrors the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire, which in 1911 took the lives of
146 New York Garment workers. Like the Bangladeshi workers, the
women at the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory were locked in the factory, which
inhibited their escape, causing greater casualties. In this way,
although the location and century has changed, capitalism has changed very
little. Dolwar Hussain, who owned the Tazreen factory, was
never charged for the accident and was a member of the Bangladesh Garment and
Exporters Association (BGMEA) an association of 4,000 garment factory owners
(Middle East Online). Bangladeshi officials quickly assigned blame
to Islamic terrorists for the fire at the factory. Sabotage and
terrorism was again blamed when on June 5th, up to 600 Bangladeshi factory
workers fell ill from polluted or poisoned water (Huffington Post). The
most likely and obvious cause of these incidents is the everyday terrorism of
capitalism against workers. In all, there have been over 1,800
deaths in fires and building collapses in Bangladesh since 2005 (Alternet). Smaller
fires are reported at a rate of more than six per month (SolidarityCenter).

Some
accidents are dramatic and receive world attention, but most are overlooked
occurrences with deaths and injuries that happen in ones and twos. For
instance, following the Savar building collapse, there was another garment
factory fire which killed eight workers. Each year, at least a
hundred workers die in Bangladesh doing building construction. Last
year, fifteen workers died ship-breaking and a similar number in rice mills. Tanneries
are also dangerous due to accidents as well as exposure to cancer causing
chemicals. Although there are 100,000 factories in and near Dhaka, as of 2012, there were only 18
inspectors. The inspectors themselves have close ties to management,
offering warning of their arrival and fines averaging $13 (Human Rights Watch). Most
politicians are also connected to the garment industry, which means that
cronyism complicates any meaningful regulation.

The most
obvious and stunningly terrible accident in Bangladesh’s garment industry was the Savar
2013 Collapse, which occurred on April 24, 2013 in Savar, a suburb of Dhaka. Over 2500 workers were
rescued for the collapsed building, but 1,127 workers died when the eight story
RanaPlaza fell apart. Over half of
the victims were women and some children at the factory nursery also died. The
upper four floors of the building were constructed without a permit and cracks
were noticed by inspectors the day before. The building itself was
only intended for shops and offices, not heavy factory equipment. Despite
the warnings from the inspectors, workers were ordered to work (New York Times). Since
these workers were not unionized and were threatened with loss of pay if they
did not work in the unsafe conditions (SolidarityCenter).

In the wake
of the incident, leftist parties, BNP, 18 Party Alliance, in the country demanded a
commission to look into unsafe buildings and the arrest of owners. Afterwards,
four individuals who owned the building were arrested. Sohel Rana,
who has been identified as the main villain, was arrested near the Indian
border a few days later (New York Times). Sohel Rana
was the owner of the building and a prominent local member of Bangladesh's ruling Awami League. Allegedly,
he skirted mandatory permits by appealing directly to a local politician, who
approved construction when Rana complained that the permit process was too
lengthy (Socialist Worker). At the end of May, the Bangladeshi
government released a four hundred page document which blamed the mayor for
granting the building construction and the owners of the building for demanding
that the workers work in unsafe conditions. The government
determined that power generators on the upper floors shook the building each
time they were on. Cracks appeared on April 23 and an engineer was
called and deemed it unsafe. Despite this, Rana and the factory
bosses ordered the workers to return (New York Times). At the same
time, Western media and political figures also clamored to place blame, which
mostly fell upon the owners of the building, sub-contractors within the
country, general denouncements of slave like conditions, or at times, the
brands whose goods were manufactured in the buildings. Factories
housed within the building included such brands as Walmart, Benetton,
Children’s Place, Mango, Monsoon, Joe Fresh, and Primark. These
brands are important, but little different than other clothing brands operating
in Bangladesh or any other sweatshop abroad. Therefore, although the
owners and brands are culpable, it is inasmuch as they are part of a larger
system of global capitalism and its race to the bottom wages.

Although
there have been arrests of building owners, the task of actually compensating
the victims has been slow going. BGMEA promised to pay
survivors their outstanding salary for the month of the collapse, plus a
month's pay for every year worked at Rana Plaza, have received the full amount
due (Guardian UK). On May 23, BGMEA announced that it would not pay
the wages of dead victims of the collapse citing that the victims would be
compensated by the government. Indeed, the Prime Minister’s Office
provided grants to victim’s families, but victims argue that was not the same
as wages and not what they were promised from BGMEA. 200,000 taka
was supposed to go to each of the victims’ families, but as of May 23, just
over 200 received this money (Dhaka Tribune). The government and
BGMEA paid for medical expenses for the workers as well as some payments of
20,000 taka for funeral expenses, but victims cited that this was not enough to
cover the costs. An additional sum of 100,000-600,000 taka is
supposed to be disbursed by the government to bereaved families, but no date
has been specified. A few retailers, such as Primark and Matalan,
have offered to compensate victims as well (Guardian UK). The
compensation process is muddled by the fact that many victims had informal or
verbal contracts with no proof of their employment. Some bodies have
not been recovered or identified, which also makes claiming compensation
difficult. Without compensation, traumatized workers at the
collapsed Rana building have little choice but to again find employment in the
garment sector.

Since the
accident, there have been massive worker protests in Dhaka. On
International Workers Day on May 1st, thousands of workers protested in Dhaka
to demand better wages and the death penalty to Sohel Rana (Guardian UK). Mass
protests in the Ashulia Industrial Belt, which produces 20% of Bangladesh’s
exports, forced the closure of 300 factories in early May. However,
after a few days, the government ordered them re-opened. At the same
time, the cabinet approved new labor laws which allowed for the formation of
unions without prior approval from factory owners and the establishment of a
wage board to consider an increase to the minimum wage. Minimum wage
Bangladesh is the lowest in the world (Rueters). Since the
establishment of the board, the BGMEA has vowed to increase minimum wage, but
has not committed to a number. Workers in Bangladesh are demanding
an increase to 3000 taka a month, or 13 cents an hour. Currently,
wages are at 930 taka a month, an amount that was set in 1994. Since
1994, the cost of living in Bangladesh has increased by 50% (Labour Behind the
Label). So, while the garment industry has dramatically increased in
value over the last ten years, the workers have not even enjoyed the most
modest wage increases.

Protests
have continued through May and June. On Wednesday June 5th, police
used teargas, live ammunition and batons to break up a demonstration by former
Rana Plaza workers. The workers were there to protest BGMEA’s
violation of the compensation agreements. Although BGMEA promised to
give four month’s pay, workers felt that it reneged on the agreement by only
giving one month’s pay (Socialist Worker). In all, 1000 protesters
from the families of victims turned out to demand compensation and for the
creation of an official list of victims. They blocked the highway
and staged a sit in until they were forced by the police to leave (Huffington
Post). The following day, garment workers from several
factories again met to protest with a twelve point demands including higher
wages and overtime payments. The protest became violent when
business owners, the Awani League, and BCL attacked the workers. Police
again intervened with batons, gas, and rubber bullets, resulting in 50 injuries
(Dhaka Tribune). On May 25th, up to 20,000 people took to the
streets in the Ashulia industrial area, again with violent response from the
police (AlterNet). Other significant events in the fight for better
wages and conditions include a May 29th incident at an export processing
zone factory wherein workers stopped working and confined management to the
building when it was announced that only a few of them were receiving wage
increases. Another work stoppage occurred on June 1st involving
hundreds of workers and over a dozen factories, again in the export processing
zone. Police injured at least fifty workers and several of the
factories were damaged during the conflict. As the result of these
and other protests, Labour behind the Label, cites that over 4,000 workers have
been arrested, with two confirmed deaths, and hundreds injured. There
are also reports that union officials who were not even at the protests were arrested
and beaten by police (Labour Behind the Label).

This raises
the question of what can be done here, so far away from these protests and
labor actions. An initial response seems to be to simply not
patronize stores or brands that use products from Bangladesh. Although
there is some merit in boycotting these goods, the tactic suffers from the
problem that it is individualized, private, and puts too much stock to the
notion of consumer sovereignty. Nevertheless, if this is done in
mass, with precise targeting, public actions, and visibly, it may exert some
pressure on brands to increase wages in Bangladesh. Yet, as Vijay
Prashad notes, “These Bangladesh factories are a part of the landscape of
globalization that is mimicked in the factories along the U.S.-Mexico border,
in Haiti, in Sri Lanka, and in other places that opened their doors to the
garment industry's savvy use of the new manufacturing and trade order
(Socialist Worker).” Therefore, the problem is not a problem with
the industry in Bangladesh or even a few brands, but all countries and all
brands. This is why a boycott should be part of a larger movement
against globalization. More importantly, the workers of Bangladesh
themselves are not calling for a boycott of these products or companies, so a
more effective strategy would be to support their demands, follow their
example, foster worker solidarity and internationalism, and build a movement
against globalization. Thus, rather than boycott, U.S. activists
should exercise solidarity.

Worker
solidarity may involve public protest of the corporations that source their
products from Bangladesh, pressuring them to give better wages and working
conditions. An example of these kinds of actions is demonstrations
against GAP’s shareholder meeting in San
Francisco in late May to demand that they adhere to stricter building and fire
codes in Bangladesh (AlterNet). More recently, protestors and
striking Walmart employees descended upon Walmart’s shareholder meeting in
Fayetteville, AK to demand better conditions for Bangladeshi workers. Walmart’s
stocks are at near an all-time high, yet it has refused to sign an agreement
with other Western brands to improve working conditions (Common Dreams). The
extravagant meeting featured celebrity performances and appearances by Hugh
Jackman, Tom Cruise, Kelly Clarkson, and Jennifer Hudson. Nevertheless,
some activists, as shareholders or invited guests, were able to address the
meeting, including former garment worker and director of the Bangladesh Center
for Worker Solidarity, Kalpona Akter, who asked Walmart to make good on their
empty promises to improve working conditions. Likewise, Janet Sparks
a striking worker from OUR Walmart pointed out that Walmart CEO Mike Duke made
over 1,000 times the salary of the average Walmart association (The Nation). Despite
pressure from activists and even shareholders, Walmart has made no commitment
to improve safety standards in Bangladesh but has instead promised that their
own inspectors would examine factory safety. Since the Savar
collapse, Walmart inspectors found cracks in the walls of a factory producing
Wrangler brand apparel, but no measures have been taken to stop production or
secure the safety of the workers there (AlterNet). This is why
linking and internationalizing labor struggles, from Walmart strikes here to
the factory collapse is Bangladesh is essential in the fight against global
capitalism. Worker solidarity can also involve donating money to
Bangladeshi union campaigns or towards the funding of factory inspections. Beyond
this essential struggle of workers, there should be a mass movement against
globalization to curtail preferential trade, free trade, and deregulation. Unless
struggle is massive and international, companies can simply find new places
with fewer regulations and wages, such as Disney, which after the Tarzeen fire,
sought new suppliers in Vietnam and Cambodia. Only the effective
organization, internationalism, and solidarity of the world’s workers can put
an end to tragedies such as the Savar Building Collapse, justice to its
victims, and a lasting vindication of the rights of all who are made to suffer
in this system.

I was about to say something on this topic. But now i can see that everything on this topic is very amazing and mind blowing, so i have nothing to say here. I am just going through all the topics and being appreciated. Thanks for sharing.